Talk:Crowdfunding
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
greetings to any interested. first, i removed the self-reference soon after adding it as i realized it is frowned upon and my intention is not to drive attention to me, but to the idea of this term.
second, this is a work in progress with almost no references to this term (since i basically coined it last month as far as i can tell). so this may be reason to remove the article. however, i think it is different enough from all related terms and should have a place here, despite its definition being in the 'realization' process.
this is my first article on wikipedia. i have only contributed to one other article (vlog). i refreshed my mind with wikipedia decorum so please excuse initial poor judgements.
sull
--
Don't delete! This is a really useful page - admitedly the name Crowdfunding could be described as crowdsourced financing, or group financing or another name, but deleting is like throwing out the baby with bath water..
--
Perhaps "P2P Funding" would be a less "neologistic" term (and would also parallel the category of P2P_Charities.) Just a humble suggestion. Also, cf. Crowdsourcing -- IshMEL
--
I moved it to P2P funding and cleaned up the first paragraph. Not sure if the Category:Crowdfunding should also be changed? -- IshMEL
--
|| Re: "Perhaps "P2P Funding" would be a less "neologistic" term".... I disagree that P2P Funding is more appropriate or even less neologistic than crowdfunding. Someone has already restored the article back to crowdfunding and thats good. crowdfunding is a more drilled down, focused article that relates to the crowdsourcing article. but it is NOT crowdsourcing. and if there are no problems with the crowdsourcing article, then nor should there be with this one. This article should be given more time to evolve and not be in need of a Book focused on it nor Wired Magazine article to save it from being deleted. When this article was first added, crowdfunding was not a commonly used term. But googling it shows a steady increase of usage, which I think shows that it has logic as a descriptor for new, progressive approaches to "funding" in this digital age. It is not a "novel idea", but rather a fact of what has been recently happening online. Crowdfunding echoes the efforts and projects that have been recently started that enable anyone to fund anything and with ease.
[edit] Original research
Wikipedia should not use original neologisms like "crowdfunding" or "P2P funding" (assuming that's original?); it should use terms used by documented sources. How do published analysts describe this phenomenon? (Also, common nouns in article titles should not be capitalized.) The overview section does not have any references, and it seems likely that it is presenting a novel idea, which is prohibited by the official policy Wikipedia:No original research. This article may need to be deleted if references to independent sources cannot be provided. -- Beland 19:36, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
